Article

Requiring an amyloid-beta1-42 biomarker for prodromal Alzheimer's disease or mild cognitive impairment does not lead to more efficient clinical trials.

Department of Psychiatry, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Alzheimer's & dementia: the journal of the Alzheimer's Association (Impact Factor: 17.47). 09/2010; 6(5):367-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2010.07.004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid-beta(1-42) concentration and high total-tau/Abeta(1-42) ratio have been recommended to support the diagnosis of prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and also to select patients for clinical trials (Shaw et al, Ann Neurol 2009;65:403-13; Dubois et al, Lancet Neurol 2007;6:734-46).
We tested this recommendation with clinical trials simulations using patients from the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative who fulfilled the following entry criteria: (1) aMCI, (2) aMCI with CSF Abeta(1-42) <or=192 mg/mL, (3) and aMCI with total-tau/Abeta(1-42) >0.39. For each criterion, we randomly resampled the database obtaining samples for 1000 trials for each trial scenario, planning for 1 or 2 year trials with samples from 50 to 400 patients per treatment or placebo group, with up to 40% dropouts, outcomes after using the AD assessment scale-cognitive subscale and clinical dementia rating scale with effect sizes ranging from 0.15 to 0.75, and calculated statistical power.
Approximately 70% to 74% of aMCI patients with CSF measures met biomarker criteria. The addition of the low Abeta(1-42) or high tau/Abeta(1-42) requirement resulted in minimal or no increase in the power of the trials compared with enrolling aMCI without requiring the biomarker criteria. Slightly larger mean differences between the placebo and treatment groups fulfilling biomarker criteria were offset by increased outcome variability within the groups.
Although patients with aMCI or patients with prodromal AD meeting CSF biomarkers criteria were slightly more cognitively impaired and showed greater decline than patients with aMCI diagnosed without considering the biomarkers, the requirement of biomarker-positive patients would most likely not result in more efficient clinical trials, and trials would take longer because fewer patients would be available. A CSF Abeta(1-42) marker, however, could be useful as an explanatory variable or covariate when warranted by the action of a drug.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Gary R Cutter, Jul 14, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
73 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionThe diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) currently relies on clinical criteria that are primarily based on the presence of an amnestic syndrome of the mesial temporal lobe type. In recent years, new diagnostic tools have been developed, such as the possibility of measuring a set of proteins directly involved in the pathophysiological process of AD. A profile suggestive of AD has been defined, characterized by decreased beta-amyloid peptide, combined with increased Tau protein and phopho-Tau.
    Revue Neurologique 06/2011; 167(6):474-484. DOI:10.1016/j.neurol.2010.10.007 · 0.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Biomarkers are characteristics that are objectively measured and evaluated as indicators of normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to a therapeutic intervention. Amyloid measures become abnormal early in the disease process and have only weak correlations with disease progression and cognitive decline; CSF tau, brain atrophy, and reduced cortical metabolism correlate with cognitive measures and disease progression. Combinations of biomarkers have higher correlations and are better predictors of future decline than single biomarkers. Current biomarkers do not account for all of the variance of AD; a more complete repertoire of biomarkers that more comprehensively assay the disease process is needed.Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2013); Accepted article preview online 8 October 2013; doi:10.1038/clpt.2013.205.
    Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics 10/2013; 95(1). DOI:10.1038/clpt.2013.205 · 7.39 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There are no substantially effective treatments or preventatives for Alzheimer disease. The few prevention trials that were undertaken did not shown efficacy for the drugs tested; but, nevertheless, advanced prevention trials methods. We review past recruitment methods and discuss areas for improvement. Improvements in recruitment methods can enhance the likelihood for accurately demonstrating the efficacy of an effective drug. Effective therapeutics to prevent AD await discovery and proof.
    The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging 04/2012; 16(4):331-5. DOI:10.1007/s12603-012-0011-6 · 2.66 Impact Factor